This is crazy, how is this a Troll comment, It's true. I keep getting Troll comments and I don't see how this is a Troll Comment at all? so someone better explain this. All is says it's a better Office product and thats true based on the fact it has more file extensions which is does and it free which it is, so someone better explain what makes this or any of my other comments troll comments because I really don't see how on earth anyone could see this comment that way.
Linux is a far advanced OS compaired to all other, it's like saying "Is the most advanced piece of technology important", So in short Yes Linux is the best OS to ever be developed and in use today period!
if I was the one buying the Office software I would, why not use Open Office, it's free, support better and more file formats. Besides the worst thing that happens by using a *Nix system in the army is more proficient computer users and more security.
Windows 7 is a horrible release of the problem and bug ridden OS. On the list of problems, the new User Interface is way to over blown. The only interface that works is a low key Gnome or Xfce based look, there is nothing good about using a desktop that requires visual effects to be called an update.
Driver signing is another retarded idea, it's a much better idea to let anyone install anything on a system, not just a signed Driver or a registered peace of software.
Windows 7 Blue screens, I thought they might be on top of basic memory errors but seriously are we surprised.
Why doesn't the US army use a hardened OS instead of a Desktop OS. I'm not saying Windows does make a decent Desktop OS but seriously I think the US army might be alittle more on top of this problem.
what about using a Hardened Linux OS or Hardened Unix OS, wouldn't that be much much more secure. I don't know I'm not an expert but seriously I think they would want to step up here.
Odd they would have certain things run in the background as a superuser. It's a major flaw, it would be like having a Linux box just go off and run things as Root, which I mean can happen but not in the Microsoft context.
Why don't they make a new user group that can access though use of a software tunnel the "Root" user on Windows and then have the "Root" user passed information from the intermediate user but only the stack references and PCB's it needs and nothing more. This could majorly tighten up the security.
I know I had to implement a method such as this when I made my own OS for a college project. I had to let the "Root" user on the system access very certain aspects of the system but most of the time it didn't matter. I think implementing that Idea would be a far better and more secure method of what there trying to achieve.
lol Then run both Windows and Linux and Evolution is a nice replacement program, and One Note well being a good program has many good open source solutions.
I'm not going say get rid of Windows but there are many great software packages for Linux that you might find are nicer to use or have features that you might prefer.
This is awesome they have this, Any even generally skilled computer use can install Ubuntu and I think it's good that a fairly decent site is covering this.
Now in no way will this convert the windows users and it's not meant to but it will open the "Window" up and let them see the rest of the OS world. Who know maybe some of the die hard Windows for life fans will come and join the Linux for freedom fans.
Okay then you should see where I'm coming from. Linux and Unix are much more capable Desktop platforms then Windows. I want to keep stressing the point that I don't think Windows is crap but I do think it needs a lot of work.
I've always likes this vantage point I've heard where a system administrator wants total security and a user wants total ease. Well why not meet in the middle. The middle is *Nix Operating Systems.
The system administrator gets all there control and the User just needs to click there way around. So based on that alone with out going into to detail I think I could get most computer hopeless users to agree. BTW Congrats on the BLFS.
To Side note. I never went to the BLFS I don't see the point on running Graphics on my systems except on my desktop which runs gnome. As for freeBSD I've never been able to use it. Every time minus the very latest 7.2 Release FreeBSD can never pick up my hardware and always crashes faster then a crash test dummy. So I've never been able to get a good enough look at it.
How man bugs exist in OpenBSD, 2, there have been 2 patches ever needed for OpenBSD. How many has there been for Windows I think you need a big scale lets see
16 log etc...
But you want to talk Linux fine, I can play
Linux is know industry wide for having better security and stability, Linux is far more user friendly then Windows because the user has the code. Linux has better memory management, a better kernel, less viruses, less spyware, less malware etc... Do I need to keep going.
you might try to tell me you can't use Memory management as a fact well actually I can. The problems with closed source software usally exist right down to the base and if the base of any OS is the kernel then it fair game.
How many times have you had a Linux box freeze out of no where and for no reason, I've actually never seen it happen, How many times has Linux has memory fault. It's rare very very rare. Okay on the other side, Windows freezes from just moving your mouse to fast or a cd misreading and almost everything else that would or could happen with a computer. Thanks to Windows 7 we now have the blue screen back. Okay so I proved that.
Mac you say, fine I'll deal myself a win. Mac is closed source and hmmm already has viruses! Interesting, it has more security bugs then Linux / Unix and it has a higher rate of crashing.
Well I think I did my part and proved my point, so lets see what you come up with this time.
And once again my Valid and very correct point
closed source = more bugs and patches.
The entire OS has this kind of bug, it's simple closed source, closed mind, open bugs. I don't want to rag but are we surprised. Now we have to wait for them to fix the bug which is going to involve getting a patch. Knowing how poorly Windows is designed someone will crack the patch to get access which will need a patch and so on.
It's a really simple formula, Windows = Broken or in c code, Windows == Broken, there is always a patch, a bug, a hole or an excuse. Come on Microsoft test your software.
Are we really surprised, Microsoft never has the User in mind ever, they abstract way to much from the user. Preventing users from access to the code that runs the system is a bad, a really bad idea. A user should always be in control of the OS and Windows is designed in such a way the User has no Control.
Is this really a bad thing, I actually see this being a positive outcome. I've been using releases of Windows 7 now for a while and I have noticed quite a few problems with it that could easily be fixed by any normal level headed programmer.
Dell has never really sided with the customer in mind, They say they support Linux installs to but when you really ask them what Linux installs they support that in fact just use the cookie cutter install which is not satisfactory under and circumstance.
Even if they do move forward with this idea to use Windows 7 there just introducing a new section of customer support.
How about instead of installing a OS with so many problems, that really is no better then Vista, they learn how to install Linux properly using maybe a stage 1 Gentoo install and send that out.
It's free and it can be upgraded for free when ever needed. All Dell would have to do is to add in a script to do all the user required update wise. Future more it could give schools a chance to teach a fair computer curriculum, I know I sure didn't get a fair one when I was in school.
As for businesses well I don't know why they still use Windows anyway, it's really an OS built on mistake thats been patched into barely working. Wouldn't it make more sense that when you have important files and data you'd want to see it secure and stored in a stable manor, doesn't seem like a hard problem to fix.
Dell should just scrap Windows support and save the customer any cost for OS install, besides it would help the world not hurt it. Say no to Windows Dell and open your computer to possibilities not limit it by mistakes!
I've done Linux Distro Development so I know a thing or two about build a install from the ground up and I run a native stage 1 gentoo install:-)
What about you
Wow, almost everything you said is completely wrong. I don't think you've ever used Linux even. Sound support is awesome you just need to configure it properly. GDM is awesome you just need to compile it properly and almost everything else you bring up is Distro depended.
If you not willing to put in the time to get a prefect OS install then don't sit here and run your mouth at it. I have an excellent install which is hardly ever broken, I would have much much more down time in Windows then I've ever had in Linux.
Next time before you post something like this actually know how to install and configure Linux and then come back and post facts and not myth
As stated above this article might cause a show down between Linux nerds and Windows users but did any one actually take time to look at the problems of both Windows and Linux on the desktop. It's all perspective really, would you install Windows on a notebook with a 100Mhz processor and less then 100MB HDD, of course not because you couldn't.
Windows has enough of it's own problems from the perspective of a Linux user to make me turn away from it and just laugh, personally I think it's one of the worst OS's ever made and it has so many problems it's really a class in how to make porgramming mistakes 101.
I know there are people who feel the same about Linux and I'm going to admit that if they don't understand Linux and why to some people it's a much better choice on the computer, they might have a reason to there thinking.
Either way you want to show down against these two OS's there it nothing in the end but preferance. There is nothing Linux can't do that Windows can, because you can always reprogram the system, the source code is present. However there are many things that Windows can't and will never do that Linux can.
Another feature these articles never seen to look at is the preformance differance. In many cases a well optimized Linux install from source so Gentoo will make Windows seem like it's 3 wheel bike on the 401 facing up against a Bugatti.
Personally I find Windows to be a good platform to go into and run a few quick games like Zoo tycoon when I'm bored, but I would never use it as a Desktop OS for everyday just because I don't find it suitable. I know many people who feel the other way and thats fine, it's about being able to say there right and I'm right.
This entire article is just silly and I don't think it can ever truely answer a question that in then end has nothing to do with Tech specs but what a end user wants.
Well I agree that USB keys have become a use once and lose piece of hardware there are still USB keys out there to hold there own.
It really just depends what you need. If all you need is a plastic key around your neck for some high school / college word documents then fork out 10 and get your self a 2GB. How ever on the other hand if you really need either performance or security then you can satisfy that to, just not for $10.
If you look at keys like the "Iron Key" you get a ton of security but at a much high cost per Gig. The average cost for the Iron Keys run:
$69 - $139 for a single Gig and that's the basic level.
On the other hand if your looking for performance you can still spend a good amount on just being able to run faster then those around you, the average cost of a performance stick:
$38 - $270 ( for a 64 GB)
so It really just breaks down to what you need, well I can agree that the average key is use once and lose kind of situation, you can still get good USB keys worth there cost.
Software should need to be locked down, the only good way to make software is from the open source method.
Whats wrong with DRM free software, seriously, it has the potential to be more secure, more stable and better platformed. I just don't see the point on having a DRM on software, can anyone make a good argument towards DRM on software.
some of the best software more so games are DRM free, lets look at the classics, Commander Keen, Chips Challenge, even Quake. Where does DRM actual help that's my question.
Thanks
Docmur
DRM is Digital Restriction Managament
on
Why Bother With DRM?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
DRM is a horrible idea, it doesn't really serve a good purpose. I spent time last year studying about DRM for college project and all my findings point it being useless.
Besides preventing certain media players from being able to play certain music files or preventing DVD's from being able to run on different Operating Systems, DRM fails to make a proper case with digital media.
I don't think allowing open copying of commercial DVD's is a good idea but I also don't think blocking music files with a DRM is a good idea.
There is no need to eliminate the idea of DRM but I think we have to put a logical cap on how we use DRM.
One of the biggest problems with DRM is OS support. Windows and Mac deal with DRM fine, but Linux and Unix don't cope well with DRM. I think if were going to allow DRM to live then we need to make sure it works 100% across all platforms. and not only on the most used platforms.
In the end DRM serves really no good purpose. DRM is really only a way to introduce problems into media and the Operating Systems that have to work with the media.
Slashdot Mirror
How would windows be the borg fake and pointless to a story line. Please. Linux is clearly the the greatest OS in history of computing!
This is crazy, how is this a Troll comment, It's true. I keep getting Troll comments and I don't see how this is a Troll Comment at all? so someone better explain this. All is says it's a better Office product and thats true based on the fact it has more file extensions which is does and it free which it is, so someone better explain what makes this or any of my other comments troll comments because I really don't see how on earth anyone could see this comment that way.
Linux is a far advanced OS compaired to all other, it's like saying "Is the most advanced piece of technology important", So in short Yes Linux is the best OS to ever be developed and in use today period!
if I was the one buying the Office software I would, why not use Open Office, it's free, support better and more file formats. Besides the worst thing that happens by using a *Nix system in the army is more proficient computer users and more security.
Windows 7 is a horrible release of the problem and bug ridden OS. On the list of problems, the new User Interface is way to over blown. The only interface that works is a low key Gnome or Xfce based look, there is nothing good about using a desktop that requires visual effects to be called an update.
Driver signing is another retarded idea, it's a much better idea to let anyone install anything on a system, not just a signed Driver or a registered peace of software.
Windows 7 Blue screens, I thought they might be on top of basic memory errors but seriously are we surprised.
Windows 7 == Fail
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
Why doesn't the US army use a hardened OS instead of a Desktop OS. I'm not saying Windows does make a decent Desktop OS but seriously I think the US army might be alittle more on top of this problem.
what about using a Hardened Linux OS or Hardened Unix OS, wouldn't that be much much more secure. I don't know I'm not an expert but seriously I think they would want to step up here.
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
Odd they would have certain things run in the background as a superuser. It's a major flaw, it would be like having a Linux box just go off and run things as Root, which I mean can happen but not in the Microsoft context.
Why don't they make a new user group that can access though use of a software tunnel the "Root" user on Windows and then have the "Root" user passed information from the intermediate user but only the stack references and PCB's it needs and nothing more. This could majorly tighten up the security.
I know I had to implement a method such as this when I made my own OS for a college project. I had to let the "Root" user on the system access very certain aspects of the system but most of the time it didn't matter. I think implementing that Idea would be a far better and more secure method of what there trying to achieve.
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
lol Then run both Windows and Linux and Evolution is a nice replacement program, and One Note well being a good program has many good open source solutions.
I'm not going say get rid of Windows but there are many great software packages for Linux that you might find are nicer to use or have features that you might prefer.
This is awesome they have this, Any even generally skilled computer use can install Ubuntu and I think it's good that a fairly decent site is covering this.
Now in no way will this convert the windows users and it's not meant to but it will open the "Window" up and let them see the rest of the OS world. Who know maybe some of the die hard Windows for life fans will come and join the Linux for freedom fans.
Thanks
Docmur
Okay then you should see where I'm coming from. Linux and Unix are much more capable Desktop platforms then Windows. I want to keep stressing the point that I don't think Windows is crap but I do think it needs a lot of work.
I've always likes this vantage point I've heard where a system administrator wants total security and a user wants total ease. Well why not meet in the middle. The middle is *Nix Operating Systems.
The system administrator gets all there control and the User just needs to click there way around. So based on that alone with out going into to detail I think I could get most computer hopeless users to agree. BTW Congrats on the BLFS.
To Side note. I never went to the BLFS I don't see the point on running Graphics on my systems except on my desktop which runs gnome. As for freeBSD I've never been able to use it. Every time minus the very latest 7.2 Release FreeBSD can never pick up my hardware and always crashes faster then a crash test dummy. So I've never been able to get a good enough look at it.
How man bugs exist in OpenBSD, 2, there have been 2 patches ever needed for OpenBSD. How many has there been for Windows I think you need a big scale lets see
16 log etc...
But you want to talk Linux fine, I can play
Linux is know industry wide for having better security and stability, Linux is far more user friendly then Windows because the user has the code. Linux has better memory management, a better kernel, less viruses, less spyware, less malware etc... Do I need to keep going.
you might try to tell me you can't use Memory management as a fact well actually I can. The problems with closed source software usally exist right down to the base and if the base of any OS is the kernel then it fair game.
How many times have you had a Linux box freeze out of no where and for no reason, I've actually never seen it happen, How many times has Linux has memory fault. It's rare very very rare. Okay on the other side, Windows freezes from just moving your mouse to fast or a cd misreading and almost everything else that would or could happen with a computer. Thanks to Windows 7 we now have the blue screen back. Okay so I proved that.
Mac you say, fine I'll deal myself a win. Mac is closed source and hmmm already has viruses! Interesting, it has more security bugs then Linux / Unix and it has a higher rate of crashing.
Well I think I did my part and proved my point, so lets see what you come up with this time. And once again my Valid and very correct point closed source = more bugs and patches.
I never said that, but what I'm implying and is true with out a doubt is that closed source has more bugs!
The entire OS has this kind of bug, it's simple closed source, closed mind, open bugs. I don't want to rag but are we surprised. Now we have to wait for them to fix the bug which is going to involve getting a patch. Knowing how poorly Windows is designed someone will crack the patch to get access which will need a patch and so on.
It's a really simple formula, Windows = Broken or in c code, Windows == Broken, there is always a patch, a bug, a hole or an excuse. Come on Microsoft test your software.
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
Are we really surprised, Microsoft never has the User in mind ever, they abstract way to much from the user. Preventing users from access to the code that runs the system is a bad, a really bad idea. A user should always be in control of the OS and Windows is designed in such a way the User has no Control.
You mean the right not not run Windows or Mac lol Long Live Tux the LLT, Free Software for all
Is this really a bad thing, I actually see this being a positive outcome. I've been using releases of Windows 7 now for a while and I have noticed quite a few problems with it that could easily be fixed by any normal level headed programmer.
Dell has never really sided with the customer in mind, They say they support Linux installs to but when you really ask them what Linux installs they support that in fact just use the cookie cutter install which is not satisfactory under and circumstance.
Even if they do move forward with this idea to use Windows 7 there just introducing a new section of customer support.
How about instead of installing a OS with so many problems, that really is no better then Vista, they learn how to install Linux properly using maybe a stage 1 Gentoo install and send that out.
It's free and it can be upgraded for free when ever needed. All Dell would have to do is to add in a script to do all the user required update wise. Future more it could give schools a chance to teach a fair computer curriculum, I know I sure didn't get a fair one when I was in school.
As for businesses well I don't know why they still use Windows anyway, it's really an OS built on mistake thats been patched into barely working. Wouldn't it make more sense that when you have important files and data you'd want to see it secure and stored in a stable manor, doesn't seem like a hard problem to fix.
Dell should just scrap Windows support and save the customer any cost for OS install, besides it would help the world not hurt it. Say no to Windows Dell and open your computer to possibilities not limit it by mistakes!
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
I've done Linux Distro Development so I know a thing or two about build a install from the ground up and I run a native stage 1 gentoo install :-)
What about you
Wow, almost everything you said is completely wrong. I don't think you've ever used Linux even. Sound support is awesome you just need to configure it properly. GDM is awesome you just need to compile it properly and almost everything else you bring up is Distro depended.
If you not willing to put in the time to get a prefect OS install then don't sit here and run your mouth at it. I have an excellent install which is hardly ever broken, I would have much much more down time in Windows then I've ever had in Linux.
Next time before you post something like this actually know how to install and configure Linux and then come back and post facts and not myth
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
As stated above this article might cause a show down between Linux nerds and Windows users but did any one actually take time to look at the problems of both Windows and Linux on the desktop. It's all perspective really, would you install Windows on a notebook with a 100Mhz processor and less then 100MB HDD, of course not because you couldn't.
Windows has enough of it's own problems from the perspective of a Linux user to make me turn away from it and just laugh, personally I think it's one of the worst OS's ever made and it has so many problems it's really a class in how to make porgramming mistakes 101.
I know there are people who feel the same about Linux and I'm going to admit that if they don't understand Linux and why to some people it's a much better choice on the computer, they might have a reason to there thinking.
Either way you want to show down against these two OS's there it nothing in the end but preferance. There is nothing Linux can't do that Windows can, because you can always reprogram the system, the source code is present. However there are many things that Windows can't and will never do that Linux can.
Another feature these articles never seen to look at is the preformance differance. In many cases a well optimized Linux install from source so Gentoo will make Windows seem like it's 3 wheel bike on the 401 facing up against a Bugatti.
Personally I find Windows to be a good platform to go into and run a few quick games like Zoo tycoon when I'm bored, but I would never use it as a Desktop OS for everyday just because I don't find it suitable. I know many people who feel the other way and thats fine, it's about being able to say there right and I'm right.
This entire article is just silly and I don't think it can ever truely answer a question that in then end has nothing to do with Tech specs but what a end user wants.
Thanks
LinuxOverWindows
Well I agree that USB keys have become a use once and lose piece of hardware there are still USB keys out there to hold there own.
It really just depends what you need. If all you need is a plastic key around your neck for some high school / college word documents then fork out 10 and get your self a 2GB. How ever on the other hand if you really need either performance or security then you can satisfy that to, just not for $10.
If you look at keys like the "Iron Key" you get a ton of security but at a much high cost per Gig. The average cost for the Iron Keys run:
$69 - $139 for a single Gig and that's the basic level.
On the other hand if your looking for performance you can still spend a good amount on just being able to run faster then those around you, the average cost of a performance stick:
$38 - $270 ( for a 64 GB)
so It really just breaks down to what you need, well I can agree that the average key is use once and lose kind of situation, you can still get good USB keys worth there cost.
Thanks
Docmur
sorry that was software shouldn't need to be locked down. Sorry I had to make that correction
Software should need to be locked down, the only good way to make software is from the open source method.
Whats wrong with DRM free software, seriously, it has the potential to be more secure, more stable and better platformed. I just don't see the point on having a DRM on software, can anyone make a good argument towards DRM on software.
some of the best software more so games are DRM free, lets look at the classics, Commander Keen, Chips Challenge, even Quake. Where does DRM actual help that's my question.
Thanks
Docmur
DRM is a horrible idea, it doesn't really serve a good purpose. I spent time last year studying about DRM for college project and all my findings point it being useless.
Besides preventing certain media players from being able to play certain music files or preventing DVD's from being able to run on different Operating Systems, DRM fails to make a proper case with digital media.
I don't think allowing open copying of commercial DVD's is a good idea but I also don't think blocking music files with a DRM is a good idea. There is no need to eliminate the idea of DRM but I think we have to put a logical cap on how we use DRM.
One of the biggest problems with DRM is OS support. Windows and Mac deal with DRM fine, but Linux and Unix don't cope well with DRM. I think if were going to allow DRM to live then we need to make sure it works 100% across all platforms. and not only on the most used platforms.
In the end DRM serves really no good purpose. DRM is really only a way to introduce problems into media and the Operating Systems that have to work with the media.
Thanks
Docmur